Republicans are split over license plate-reading cameras made by a single company that has blanketed the United States, raising fears of civil liberties breaches and Big Brother-style surveillance.
Flock Safety's once-local policing tool has grown into a vast, searchable network, with 120,000 cameras across 49 states that automatically track the license plates on passing vehicles.
Reports of alleged misuse, fears over abortion and immigration tracking and the prospect of federal access have turned an obscure local issue into a national battle.
Opponents have taken to marking their locations with notices or holding up signs to block the views of the cameras. Cameras have been vandalized and protests against their adoption have erupted nationwide.
Now a debate has been sparked in the West Wing about the federal use of the surveillance technology that has left some Republicans squeamish.
'Flock has been something we've been chatting about,' a former CIA official told the Daily Mail. 'I think it's creepy and has the vulnerability of being hacked by the Chinese or some other adversary. It's Big Brother. Don't care who's running the government, it's too tempting to weaponize.'
What separates Flock from other systems is its advanced camera optics, the former agent said. The cameras are not simply license plate readers but can identify people by their face or even the way that they walk.
'Right now, it's mostly plate reader stuff, but the hardware has the ability to do facial and gait recognition. Supplement that with AI, and you can do a world of ubiquitous technical surveillance.'
Flock Safety surveillance cameras automatically read license plates of passing cars
President Donald Trump said on Monday that he will be researching the surveillance system and make a determination within weeks about their federal use
'I think it's creepy and has the vulnerability of being hacked by the Chinese or some other adversary,' a former CIA official told the Daily Mail
The federal, state and municipal use of the surveillance technology comes with trade-offs, the source added: 'Security for privacy.'
One of the loudest Republican opponents of the federal use of Flock technology is Tennessee Congressman Tim Burchett, who told the Daily Mail he sees cases in which the government could weaponize the technology against US citizens.
'I can see a lot of room for abuse at the national level if there's some national organization that oversees it,' he said.
'If they had it during COVID, it would've been a complete police state. Why are they putting them up in front of churches and gun stores?'
Recently, the Tennessee Republican Party introduced a bill to restrict federal agencies from purchasing, operating or accessing such surveillance systems. The Protection Against Mass Surveillance Act, if passed, would limit federal funding for the systems.
Burchett says his concerns stem from the Constitution, specifically the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by the federal government.
Though he has had conversations with law enforcement about the technologies' use cases in cracking down on crime, the congressman reiterated: 'Get a warrant.'
He's far from the only GOP member sounding the alarm.
Another GOP member of Congress anonymously warned: 'I am deeply concerned about the impacts and the proliferation of new technologies creating a surveillance state and infringing on our rights to privacy.'
'I can see a lot of room for abuse at the national level if there's some national organization that oversees it,' Republican congressman Tim Burchett told the Daily Mail
Opponents to the security systems have taken to marking their locations with notices or holding up signs to block the views of the cameras
Protesters have advocated against the expansion of the systems as local municipalities and states look to sign contracts with the company
They added: 'We believe a balance must be struck to safeguard our privacy while ensuring law enforcement has the tools it needs to take violent offenders off the streets. The need for warrants has never been greater.'
GOP congressmen Thomas Massie and Scott Perry have also come out against the federal use of Flock.
'Well, it's being studied right now,' Trump said in the Oval Office this week. 'You know, you have pros and cons, right? It's being studied right now. We'll have an answer soon, as to our views on it, in the coming weeks.'
While the president and his administration study the matter, multiple Republican lawmakers and scores of Democrats have come out against the systems.
But the ongoing discussion in the White House revolves around whether they should be more widely adopted by the federal government, particularly in law enforcement capacities.
Stephen Miller, the president's top policy adviser, declined to comment on whether he wants access to Flock for federal immigration officials, but he did blame the current 'public attitudes and views' on Flock on the left.
'You have parts of this country run by the left, where they make the good guys into the bad guy and the bad guys into the good guy,' he told the Daily Mail. 'And the key to the Trump administration's policy is we protect the good guys and we punish the bad guys.'
'We don't have a contract with them,' a Department of Homeland Security official told the Daily Mail in a statement. The source did not say whether or not the department is seeking a future contract.
A vandalized Flock Safety system covered in paint in Houston by angry protestors
An unhappy resident in Troy, New York protests Flock cameras at a City Hall meeting
Two United States Secret Service sources say the White House does not use Flock, but that they have their own advanced capabilities using an array of cameras and sensors.
Flock Safety was founded in 2017 by three Georgia Tech graduates in Atlanta. The company now makes $300 million per year.
Its cameras include AI-powered automatic license plate readers that document passing vehicles, their license plates, along with their makes, models, colors and distinguishing features, such as dents, stickers or other damage.
These identifiable details are then uploaded to a database that police can search. That data is often used to help authorities identify stolen vehicles, track missing persons and generate investigative leads.
Opponents of the systems claim they pose risks of mass surveillance, police misuse leading to wrongful stops, cybersecurity vulnerabilities, and the erosion of Fourth Amendment protections. Proponents say they help municipalities crack down on crime.
The company has partnered with the FBI, Homeland Security Investigations, the National Park Service, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) in the past.
It also works with Veterans Affairs hospitals and US military bases, according to the Flock website.
A Flock Safety spokesman stressed how the company has been used to help law enforcement and its cloud systems have 'never been hacked.'
'Flock does not use facial recognition and we do not have facial recognition technology in development. The suggestion that our LPR hardware is being designed to enable facial or gait recognition is incorrect.'
